News
Florida wants to build SpaceX and Blue Origin three extra rocket landing pads
First reported by Florida Today, economic development agency Space Florida has expressed serious interest in funding the construction of two major space infrastructure projects in Cape Canaveral, a runway for a prospective Boeing spaceplane and a separate landing zone with up to three pads open for vertical rocket landings from companies like SpaceX, Blue Origin, and others.
KSC reviewing state proposals for new Launch Complex 48, Landing Zone 2: https://t.co/qjoWa0rNoa
— James Dean (@flatoday_jdean) August 6, 2018
SpaceX already operates its duo of rocket landing pads (Landing Zones) designated LZ-1 and LZ-2. Located on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station property, those pads have already supported 11 successful Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rocket landings, beginning with the company’s first-ever Falcon 9 booster recovery (December 2015) and ending more recently with the jaw-dropping mirrored landings of both Falcon Heavy side boosters after the rocket’s inaugural launch.
The exact operational capacity of those SpaceX-built landing zones is not entirely clear, meaning that it’s difficult to know if or when SpaceX would need access to two or even three additional pads. Built out of high-temperature concrete and serviced by a handful of automated fire control water jets, the only visible wear and tear the pads seem to suffer through is the routine destruction of their radar-reflective paint, intended to help Falcons more easily determine the vertical distance to their landing targets and thus accurately throttle and gimbal the one or three Merlin engines used to land.
-
- The first successfully recovered Falcon 9 rocket booster now sits proudly in front of SpaceX’s Hawthorne, CA factory and headquarters. (Steve Jurvetson)
-
- Falcon Heavy’s side boosters seconds away from near-simultaneous landings at Landing Zones 1 and 2. (SpaceX)
-
- Elon Musk walks among his recovered Falcon Heavy boosters at LZ-1 and 2. (Elon Musk)
It’s entirely possible that that radar-reflective coating is landing-critical, but the fact that just one of SpaceX’s two LZs was painted with it for Falcon Heavy’s dual rocket landings indicates that it’s at most a useful crutch. As such, the only thing lost by repeated and high-frequency landings at LZ-1 and LZ-2 would be a coat of aesthetically pleasing but nonfunctional paint. Over time, it’s likely that maintenance and refurbishment would be necessary, but the pads currently do not require any critical refurbishment to the landing areas themselves between Falcon landings.
As such, the only conceivable instance where SpaceX would obviously need three or even four rocket landing pads would be multiple lightweight Falcon Heavy launches just days apart or a Falcon Heavy launch followed within a few days by a light Falcon 9 launch. A need for that capability is almost certainly a year or more away, as 2019 is shaping up to be a slow period for space launch compared to recent years.
-
- SpaceX’s LZ-1 pad just after a Falcon 9 landing. Note the black, radar-reflective paint. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s West Coast landing zone is preparing for its debut, currently NET October 6th 2018. (Pauline Acalin/Teslarati)
SpaceX’s next land-based rocket landing may actually occur on the West Coast, marking the debut of the company’s first Californian rocket landing zone after the late-September launch of the Argentinian SAOCOM-1A Earth observation satellite.
Space Florida is an official wing of the Florida state government tasked specifically with shepherding the region’s truly unique space industry and spaceflight infrastructure with an annual budget averaging between $10 and 20 million. More importantly, the agency has direct access to Florida legislators, allowing it to have some level of access to the entire state’s borrowing powers for the purpose of petitioning for and securing invaluable loans for companies involved in Florida’s space economy or considering joining in.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
